Posted 3 years ago on Sept. 9, 2013, 3:47 p.m. EST by gmxusa
(274)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

AIPAC to go all-out on Syria and possibly send America in a war against Iran.

"The powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC is planning to launch a major lobbying campaign to push wayward lawmakers to back the resolution authorizing U.S. strikes against Syria, sources said Thursday.

Officials say that some 250 Jewish leaders and AIPAC activists will storm the halls on Capitol Hill beginning next week to persuade lawmakers that Congress must adopt the resolution or risk emboldening Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear weapon. They are expected to lobby virtually every member of Congress, arguing that “barbarism” by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated, and that failing to act would “send a message” to Tehran that the U.S. won’t stand up to hostile countries’ efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, according to a source with the group.

“History tells us that ambiguity [in U.S. actions] invites aggression,” said the AIPAC source who asked not to be named. The source added the group will now be engaged in a “major mobilization” over the issue.

Despite the group’s political muscle, it often doesn’t get involved in congressional fights over authorizing military action, and it had been mum about intervening in Syria as recently as last week.

But the stepped-up involvement comes at a welcome time for the White House, which is struggling to muster the votes in both chambers for a resolution that would give President Barack Obama the authority to engage in “limited” military action in Syria for 60 days, with one 30-day extension possible. The hawkish group also has ties to many Republicans, including ones who have been critical of the Obama administration’s handling of U.S.-Israeli affairs.

The top two Senate GOP leaders — Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Minority Whip John Cornyn of Texas — both have already been urged by top Jewish donors and AIPAC allies to back the Syria resolution, sources say. Unlike their House GOP counterparts who endorsed the measure, McConnell and Cornyn have withheld their support.

A Cornyn aide said Thursday that the senator currently opposes the Syria resolution, which will be debated on the Senate floor next week.

“If the vote were held today, Sen. Cornyn would vote no,” said Megan Mitchell, a spokeswoman for Cornyn. “What he is waiting to see is a credible plan from the administration that will achieve our national security objectives. Specifically, a plan to keep chemical weapons out of the hands of terrorists.”

Don Stewart, a spokesman for McConnell, said that his boss had yet to announce his position on the resolution. McConnell said earlier this week: “While we are learning more about his plans, Congress and our constituents would all benefit from knowing more about what it is he thinks needs to be done — and can be accomplished — in Syria and the region.”

Indeed, AIPAC and the White House also have their work cut out for them in the House — and among Democrats.

Leaving a classified briefing on Syria Thursday, Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.) said she was undecided on the issue.

“For me, it’s about what makes sense for this country,” Tsongas said when asked how the security of Israel was playing into her deliberations.

Christians from England established the United States. Many of the British North American colonies that eventually formed the United States of America were settled in the seventeenth century by men and women, who, in the face of European persecution, refused to compromise passionately held religious convictions and fled Europe. The New England colonies, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland were conceived and established "as plantations of religion." Some settlers who arrived in these areas came for secular motives--"to catch fish" as one New Englander put it--but the great majority left Europe to worship God in the way they believed to be correct. They enthusiastically supported the efforts of their leaders to create "a city on a hill" or a "holy experiment," whose success would prove that God's plan for his churches could be successfully realized in the American wilderness. Even colonies like Virginia, which were planned as commercial ventures, were led by entrepreneurs who considered themselves "militant Protestants" and who worked diligently to promote the prosperity of the church.

Practicing arcane rituals involving animal sacrifice in the 21st century drives another nail into the coffin for Judeo-Christian belief. It gives pause to not only sympathizing with Jewish causes, but also raises questions about the point of carrying the burden of the animal sacrifice ritual thousands of years old into the future. Do Jews have more privileges than Voo Doo Witch Doctors?

"God commanded the nation of Israel to perform numerous sacrifices according to certain procedures prescribed by God. First, the animal had to be spotless. Second, the person offering the sacrifice had to identify with the animal. Third, the person offering the animal had to inflict death upon it. When done in faith, this sacrifice provided a temporary covering of sins. Another sacrifice called for on the Day of Atonement, described in Leviticus 16, demonstrates forgiveness and the removal of sin. The high priest was to take two male goats for a sin offering. One of the goats was sacrificed as a sin offering for the people of Israel (Leviticus 16:15), while the other goat was released into the wilderness (Leviticus 16:20-22). The sin offering provided forgiveness, while the other goat provided the removal of sin."

Jews are ultimately responsible for the division they have created through segregating themselves and staying apart from the Gentile society around them.

A apartment building was burned down during a Voo Doo ritual in Brooklyn in 2011. If a Voo Doo doctor moved into your building what would you do?

For the Jews who rejected Jesus as their Messiah, animal sacrifices done in obedience to the Old Testament covenant were stopped in A.D. 70 at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the armies of Rome. Jesus warned of this in the Gospels.

For the Christian community, animal sacrifices stopped with the death and resurrection of Christ. There were some who were persecuted or pressured by the Jewish community to continue to offer sacrifices either because they rejected Jesus or felt his death was not enough. The book of Hebrews actually deals with this and shows that the Old Testament sacrificial system (the Old Covenant) was temporary until the coming of Christ who was the fulfillment of all that the sacrificial system anticipated. Paul teaches us the same thing in passages like Colossians 2:16f. It was Paul who specifically pointed to Christ as our Passover who was sacrificed for us (see 1 Corinthians 5:7). In keeping with the Lord’s Supper, instituted just before His death, Jesus also celebrated what was actually the last legitimate Passover by which He also pointed to Himself as the sacrifice for our sin.

Today, when Jews observe the Passover they cannot offer sacrifices because sacrifices are only to be offered in Jerusalem and in the temple. Prophetically, many believe that in the future during the time of Daniel’s 70th week, the temple will be rebuilt and sacrifices will again be offered, but only because the Jews continue to reject Jesus as their Messiah. The sacrifices will once again be stopped by the beast of Revelation 13 the Jews will be persecuted until Messiah returns at which time they will turn to Him “whom they have pierced,” to put it in the words of Zechariah.

Americans need to be aware of the implications of the obligatory defense of Israel and decide whether it is something the United States shall continue to support.

The article mentions "250 Jewish leaders" going to Washington to lobby for war, knowing that 98% of Americans are against it. Why don't you ask your Jewish friends what they are doing to stop their leaders. Who is doing the "divisive crap"?

The right-wing is doing this because they can and have nothing to lose. Not much different from a burglar inside a bank without security guards. The group's aim is to use US resources to benefit another country and put American lives in danger. What appalls me is that OWS does not address this elephant in the room.

A very poor choice of words perhaps reflecting a baser, darker and unacceptable racist view of a whole group of people, as rightly alluded to by other posters on this thread. For a wider perspective re.AIPAC :

When the news broke that President Obama wanted to launch military strikes in Syria, I was sitting in a hotel in Jerusalem nearing the end of a fact-finding mission examining the situation on the ground in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What I had recently witnessed was the failure of the US to uphold not only international law but its own stated policy as Israel effectively colonized East Jerusalem and vast swathes of the West Bank, encircling Palestinian cantons in a sea of Israeli-only settlements, roads, state lands, and military zones.

Even the initiation of the US-brokered peace process seems to have had little impact on the Israeli calculus. I arrived in the country the same week as Martin Indyk, the US envoy for the talks. In the days immediately preceding my arrival, and in the three weeks I spent in the country, the Israeli government announced the construction of over 4,400 new settlement units. In the same period of time, 11 Palestinian families were made homeless through house demolitions. Under present circumstances, a contiguous Palestinian state seems like an impossible dream.

So when President Obama made his case for military strikes against Assad, I couldn't help but compare my recent experience with the news emerging about Syria. It wasn't just the hypocrisy of the US proclaiming the need to enforce international law in one instance while flagrantly obstructing it in another. I thought about how it was fitting, in a way, that, in West Jerusalem, Israelis were scrambling for gas masks being distributed by a government agency while, on the other side of the city, the Zir family was huddled in a cave after the demolition of their home. While the Israelis were out playing their narrative of impending annihilation, the Palestinians were living a real-life story of destruction. But in the US, it's the former story, the one that is mostly bluster, that has traction and informs policy, while the other is largely ignored. And this is thanks, in part, to the self-proclaimed “most influential foreign policy lobbying organization on Capitol Hill,” the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, known popularly by its acronym, AIPAC.

Many of the ways in which AIPAC has promoted strife and obstructed justice have been direct and undeniable. Insistence that US aid to Israel be unconditional is a central pillar of the organization, even though continued US aid to a military engaging in human rights abuses is a violation of US law. They have worked vigorously to ensure that the US veto every resolution put before the UN Security Council condemning Israel for its illegal settlement activities. And this week, AIPAC is sending some 250 lobbyists to the Hill to push Congress to disregard US public opinion and authorize a military intervention in Syria.

So why does AIPAC think that we should bomb Syria? To set an example for Iran.

What AIPAC is saying is that if the US doesn't bomb Syria, it will send a message to Iran that the US doesn't follow through on its threats regarding red lines. Combined with its campaign to shift the red line for war with Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon to acquiring a yet-undefined “nuclear weapons capability,” AIPAC sees bombing Syria as serving two purposes: first, as a warning to Iran not to develop a “nuclear weapons capability,” whatever that is; and second, as a precedent for the US to bomb Iran whenever it's been conveniently determined that it has crossed that vague and indeterminate red line.

AIPAC's long-term efforts to prevent US diplomacy with Iran and to counter Iranian influence in the Middle East have also helped prolong the civil war in Syria. The Obama administration has admitted that there is no military solution to Syria's civil war and that an end to the conflict can only be achieved through a negotiated settlement. But opportunities both past and present to pursue just that have been squandered because the US has been more interested in isolating Iran than bringing about an end to the bloodshed in Syria.

Iran's influence with the Assad regime is undeniable and their cooperation will be necessary to secure a cease-fire. Yet, last year, Iran was not invited to a peace conference on Syria that was held in Geneva, a fact which many attribute to the conference's failure. A second Geneva conference has been proposed, but the US has refused to allow Iran to attend, which, in turn, has prevented the conference from convening. The US has also yet to engage directly with Iran to find a diplomatic way to address the chemical weapons issue, even though new Iran President Hassan Rouhani, who ran on a message of reconciliation with the US, has condemned the alleged use of chemical weapons.

A negotiated settlement that has any chance of securing a lasting peace in Syria must include input from all major backers of the key players, including Iran. The more time the US wastes trying to mitigate Iranian influence in Syria, the higher the death-toll will climb. The question is whether human lives are more important than a decades-old squabble with another nation.

There is no evidence that Iran is trying to acquire a nuclear weapon. In fact, both US and Israeli intelligence agree that the Iranian leadership has not decided to pursue a nuclear weapon. The true value of the tale spun by AIPAC about Iran and Syria is that it plays into the narrative that there are always enemies out there looking to destroy Israel. That very same narrative is used as justification by people here in the US to turn a blind eye to what Israel is doing to the Palestinians.

It is time that this narrative be put to rest. We can take a significant step toward dispensing with these boogie men by pushing for the US to pursue diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict with Iran and the one in Syria. A recent offer facilitated by Russia and Iran for Assad to put Syria's chemical weapons under the control of international monitors could hold promise and must be fully explored. But even if this particular deal should fall through, there would still be options available, such as referral to the International Criminal Court, convening a meeting of the 189 signatories of the Chemical Weapons Convention, and working with Russia and Iran to secure a cease-fire.

AIPAC is isolated right now in its quest to pressure Congress to authorize a US military intervention in Syria. They can be defeated, but we must stay vigilant. Call Congress today and every day until bombing Syria is off the table.

In 16th century England, church attendance was mandatory. Absence from church was punishable by fines and other sanctions.

Anyone who took office in the English church or government was required to take the Oath of Supremacy; penalties for violating it included hanging and quartering. Attendance at Anglican services became obligatory—those who refused to attend Anglican services, whether Roman Catholics or Protestants (Puritans), were fined and physically punished as recusants.

The United States of America would not even exist without English Christian colonists. Unfortunately, today the leadership of the United States is not Christian, but are led by greedy international capitalist mercantilist.

AIPAC should withdraw their request for war. The Syrians deserve better solutions. The Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch employs the oldest surviving liturgy in Christianity, the Liturgy of St. James the Apostle, and uses Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic spoken by Jesus Christ and his Apostles, as its official and liturgical language.

Canada should team up with Australia, tag-team lobby the US to take over Isreal and Syria, and force their citizens to scatter to random places around the world. Families can stay together to some extent. Then drop borders, let Palestinians roam freely, and flood the empty regions with Chinese and Indian displaced farmers. Call it Chindianadia.